5363 CRB-2-08-7 (2009). White v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

• Court: Connecticut

Connecticut Workers Compensation 2009. 5363 CRB-2-08-7 (2009). White v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc CASE NO. 5363 CRB-2-08-7COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION JUNE 30, 2009DENA WHITE CLAIMANT-APPELLEE v. WAL-MART STORES, INC. EMPLOYER and CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC INSURER RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTSAPPEARANCES: The claimant was represented by Michael D. Colonese, Esq., Brown Jacobson, PC, Twenty-Two Courthouse Square, P.O. Box 391, Norwich, CT 06360. The respondents were represented by Timothy P. Knotts, Esq., Varunes & Associates, PC, 5 Grand Street, Hartford, CT 06106. Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield was represented by Lucas D. Strunk, Esq., Pomeranz, Drayton & Stabnick, 95 Glastonbury Boulevard, Glastonbury, CT 06033. Anthem joined in the brief submitted on behalf of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Claims Management, Inc. This Petition for Review from the July 1, 2008 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for the Second District was heard January 23, 2009 before a Compensation Review Board panel consisting of the Commission Chairman John A. Mastropietro and Commissioners Peter C. Mlynarczyk and Randy L. Cohen.OPINIONJOHN A. MASTROPIETRO, CHAIRMAN.The claimant in this matter has a compensable back injury as a result of a work-related injury which occurred April 13, 2003. She sought an award from this Commission determining that her need for surgery at L3-L4 was causally connected to her 2003 injury. The trial commissioner concluded that the claimant's back condition at L3-L4 was due to the compensable injury. The respondents appealed, but upon review of the record we find the trial commissioner had sufficient basis to reach this conclusion. We affirm the Finding and Award and dismiss this appeal.The commissioner found the following subordinate facts in issuing the Finding and Award. An initial Finding and Award for this claim was issued on May 24, 2004, where it was found the respondents failed to either contest liability or commence payments on the claim within the statutory deadline under § 31-294c C.G.S. As a result, the respondents were precluded from contesting that the claim was compensable. A second Finding and Award was issued on May 25, 2006. It found that as a result of the claimant's April 13, 2003 compensable back injury the claimant underwent an L4-5 posterior fusion by Dr. Paonessa on September 17...